The documents were still flowing on Friday afternoon, with a New York Times report that Mueller was in possession of a draft letter explaining Trump’s rationale for firing Comey. The draft was reportedly written by Trump and an aide, Stephen Miller, but rejected by the White House counsel, on unknown grounds.
Trump has said he fired Comey while experiencing frustration at the FBI investigation of his campaign’s alleged Russia ties and at Comey’s refusal to publicly exculpate Trump. The firing ironically hastened the appointment of a special counsel, under whom the investigation has expanded.

Former US attorneys judged the draft letter and its possession by Mueller as significant. “Logical assumption: If WH Counsel wouldn’t let him send it, [Trump] had improper if not illegal motives for firing FBI Director Comey,” wrote Joyce Vance, a former federal prosecutor in Birmingham, Alabama, and now a University of Alabama law professor.

“Hard to assess significance without knowing the actual contents of the draft firing letter and why WH counsel vetoed it. But can’t be good,” wrote Preet Bharara, the former US attorney for the southern district of New York and now a professor at New York University’s law school.

Ryan Goodman, a former special counsel at the defense department, tweeted that a “big implication” of the draft letter’s existence was that Miller, the aide who helped Trump draft the letter, is “perhaps implicated in conspiracy to obstruct justice”.

Other documents revealed a changing narrative in Trump campaign contacts with Russian agents. The Washington Post reported Monday that during the campaign, Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen wrote an email to an aide to Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, asking for help with a real estate deal.

It was further revealed that early on in the presidential campaign, Trump signed a non-binding letter of intent to build a tower in Moscow, Cohen confirmed in a statement to ABC News. Trump claimed during the campaign that he “knows nothing about Russia” and had “no loans” and “no deals” there.

In a separate incident, Manafort took notes, since obtained by Mueller, about a June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower arranged by Trump Jr, who expressed eagerness to receive damaging information about Hillary Clinton, NBC News reported on Friday.
Manafort’s notes reportedly referred to political contributions and to the “RNC”, or Republican National Committee. The president personally dictated a statement released by Trump Jr saying the meeting “primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children”, the Washington Post reported in July.

The details of any Trump deal or debt with a Russian connection, if any exist, are not publicly known – but yet another headline this week indicated that Mueller may have gained insight on the subject. According to a Daily Beast report on Thursday, the special counsel has enlisted the help of agents from the criminal investigation unit of the Internal Revenue Service.

“I think he got everybody’s tax returns,” said Mariotti, now a defense attorney at Thompson Coburn in Chicago. “I have no professional, personal knowledge of it, but when you’re looking at someone for something unrelated to taxes, still to get tax return information is very valuable information that tells you a lot of valuable things: who owes them money, who they owe money to, and where they keep their money.”

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!-----------------------------------------
"Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
According to a Daily Beast report on Thursday, the special counsel has enlisted the help of agents from the criminal investigation unit of the Internal Revenue Service.

“I think he got everybody’s tax returns,” said Mariotti, now a defense attorney at Thompson Coburn in Chicago. “I have no professional, personal knowledge of it, but when you’re looking at someone for something unrelated to taxes, still to get tax return information is very valuable information that tells you a lot of valuable things: who owes them money, who they owe money to, and where they keep their money.”

This is getting more and more interesting!

Sharpen yer weenie roastin' sticks and get the fire rolling! Can't wait to see this one.

Oh, I'm already by the campfire with my roastin' stick at the ready!!!

This should be good...

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by Wishimay:

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
According to a Daily Beast report on Thursday, the special counsel has enlisted the help of agents from the criminal investigation unit of the Internal Revenue Service.

“I think he got everybody’s tax returns,” said Mariotti, now a defense attorney at Thompson Coburn in Chicago. “I have no professional, personal knowledge of it, but when you’re looking at someone for something unrelated to taxes, still to get tax return information is very valuable information that tells you a lot of valuable things: who owes them money, who they owe money to, and where they keep their money.”

This is getting more and more interesting!

Sharpen yer weenie roastin' sticks and get the fire rolling! Can't wait to see this one.

For the most part, the press serves a purpose, but many times they allow the business side of the industry to dictate their coverage. In other words....RATINGS (which leads to advertising and big bucks).

I agree, the media can be super hypocritical, especially in their coverage of politics and political figures. They're right though, his attention span does not allow for deep thinking and cognitive thought.

What makes their criticism of his interest in his pardoning power particularly on point, is that normally a president uses it to right a terrible wrong; to undo an egregious error in the name of justice. In the grand scheme of things in this country, we cherish justice and civil rights, especially when the punishment does not fit the crime; or when there is a particularly obvious miscarriage of justice.

What Trump did, in many eyes (especially those of law enforcement and legal institutions), when he pardoned Sheriff Joe, was considered a slap in the face to the legal system and rule of law in this land. He, on the other hand, considers his action to be one of fairness and law and order. Of course, justice may have a different take on the matter; but as everyone knows...she's blind. I think it's more his motives that are coming into question, well more than anything else.

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by second:
With long precedent of presidents crafting, explaining, debating, negotiating, and selling bills, Trump is under increasing pressure to read one.

Press rips Prez for lack of intellectual curiosity, then slams him for expressing curiosity about his pardoning authority. Can't have it both ways!

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Typical of Trump, he’s too incompetent to implement even policies that are straightforward and have broad bipartisan support:

….The Trump administration is also moving to cut off from the international financial system Chinese banks and trading companies that supply Pyongyang, however, those cases are moving slowly because of the hiring freeze at the State Department and personnel shortages at the Justice and Treasury departments, according to Stanton. “The government has made some of the right policy decisions, at least in sanctions, but they are not putting enough people on task," he said.

That Mueller brought in the IRS makes it look more and more like the initial "Russian collusion" allegation is deader than a doornail.

I wouldn't be surprised if he came up with charges about everything BUT. Let's keep an eye out for it. Just to keep things interesting, we should start a drinking game for every time "Russian collusion" is charged.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
That Mueller brought in the IRS makes it look more and more like the initial "Russian collusion" allegation is deader than a doornail.

I wouldn't be surprised if he came up with charges about everything BUT. Let's keep an eye out for it. Just to keep things interesting, we should start a drinking game for every time "Russian collusion" is charged.

The Trump Administration (if you could call it that) hasn't a clue as to what to do, pure and simple, least of all Trump who has never served in public office.

It's like giving a baby a bike, with no training wheels, and expecting him to do wheelies. (I said baby, ha that's funny).

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by second:
Typical of Trump, he’s too incompetent to implement even policies that are straightforward and have broad bipartisan support:

….The Trump administration is also moving to cut off from the international financial system Chinese banks and trading companies that supply Pyongyang, however, those cases are moving slowly because of the hiring freeze at the State Department and personnel shortages at the Justice and Treasury departments, according to Stanton. “The government has made some of the right policy decisions, at least in sanctions, but they are not putting enough people on task," he said.

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
That Mueller brought in the IRS makes it look more and more like the initial "Russian collusion" allegation is deader than a doornail.

I wouldn't be surprised if he came up with charges about everything BUT. Let's keep an eye out for it. Just to keep things interesting, we should start a drinking game for every time "Russian collusion" is charged.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
And you know this because...?

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
There's enough people on the task. Government employees only work at about 1/4 of their potential because of a lack of motivation.

Put their jobs on the line and watch it get done quickly.

Because I've been laid off twice in the private sector from two high paying jobs, and I've avoided twice as many layoffs.

Government employees don't worry about losing their jobs. This is the number one reason why people dread having to work with any government employees to get anything done. They don't care. They're lazy, unmotivated, and in the case of the forced diversity hires that trump actual talent they are also unqualified for the position in the first place.

Start cracking the whip and letting them know that their jobs are on the line if they don't start performing and you'll see all the little ants get in a line to start working.

So the same IRS which denied Americans their 1st Amendment rights under Obama and targeted citizens for their political views is now the tool by which the same Deep State wants to go after a duly elected President ?

Trump could have fired Comey because he didn't like his tie. The President doesn't NEED a reason.

But the fact that Comey did in fact exonerate Trump, 3x, but refused to say so publically is proof he needed to be fired.

Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor:
So the same IRS which denied Americans their 1st Amendment rights under Obama and targeted citizens for their political views is now the tool by which the same Deep State wants to go after a duly elected President ?

Trump could have fired Comey because he didn't like his tie. The President doesn't NEED a reason.

But the fact that Comey did in fact exonerate Trump, 3x, but refused to say so publically is proof he needed to be fired.

How many times will Mueller need to exonerate Trump before he finally admits it publicly?

Mueller is about to subpoena Trump aides and administration officials, including Reince Priebus and Trump's White House attorneys. He will depose them and grill them for info regarding the Kelly appointment and subsequent dismissal.

This has 'international incident' written all over it.

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor:
So the same IRS which denied Americans their 1st Amendment rights under Obama and targeted citizens for their political views is now the tool by which the same Deep State wants to go after a duly elected President ?

Trump could have fired Comey because he didn't like his tie. The President doesn't NEED a reason.

But the fact that Comey did in fact exonerate Trump, 3x, but refused to say so publically is proof he needed to be fired.

How many times will Mueller need to exonerate Trump before he finally admits it publicly?

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Mueller is about to subpoena Trump aides and administration officials, including Reince Priebus and Trump's White House attorneys. He will depose them and grill them for info regarding the Kelly appointment and subsequent dismissal.

This has 'international incident' written all over it.

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor:
So the same IRS which denied Americans their 1st Amendment rights under Obama and targeted citizens for their political views is now the tool by which the same Deep State wants to go after a duly elected President ?

Trump could have fired Comey because he didn't like his tie. The President doesn't NEED a reason.

But the fact that Comey did in fact exonerate Trump, 3x, but refused to say so publically is proof he needed to be fired.

How many times will Mueller need to exonerate Trump before he finally admits it publicly?

What you're talking about is the DMV syndrome...(Dept. of Motor Vehicles); they are notorious for being lazy SOBs. But I've worked the private sector as well, and I have found pockets of laziness within the corporate system that closely matches that of government employment.

I used to work for a large company that didn't have a clue what their own employees did for a living within their own system. Both bosses and workers shuffling papers and their feet until it was quitting time. So it happens everywhere, with all kinds of people (just in case you had it in mind that only certain type of people are lazy).

Each individual must answer to themselves on their work ethic.

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by 6stringJoker:

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
And you know this because...?

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
There's enough people on the task. Government employees only work at about 1/4 of their potential because of a lack of motivation.

Put their jobs on the line and watch it get done quickly.

Because I've been laid off twice in the private sector from two high paying jobs, and I've avoided twice as many layoffs.

Government employees don't worry about losing their jobs. This is the number one reason why people dread having to work with any government employees to get anything done. They don't care. They're lazy, unmotivated, and in the case of the forced diversity hires that trump actual talent they are also unqualified for the position in the first place.

Start cracking the whip and letting them know that their jobs are on the line if they don't start performing and you'll see all the little ants get in a line to start working.

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
What you're talking about is the DMV syndrome...(Dept. of Motor Vehicles); they are notorious for being lazy SOBs. But I've worked the private sector as well, and I have found pockets of laziness within the corporate system that closely matches that of government employment.

I used to work for a large company that didn't have a clue what their own employees did for a living within their own system. Both bosses and workers shuffling papers and their feet until it was quitting time. So it happens everywhere, with all kinds of people (just in case you had it in mind that only certain type of people are lazy).

Each individual must answer to themselves on their work ethic.

SGG

Yeah, it happens everywhere for sure, but especially in the economy we've lived in the last 12 or so years there aren't many private sector jobs left where they haven't laid off the under-performing employees.

It's only government jobs and Union jobs where they get paid a livable wage with benefits and are virtually immune to losing their jobs where it runs rampant though.

It's damn near impossible to get those jobs, particularly if you're a white male today, but once you're in you're basically set for life unless you get caught doing some heinous shit.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

The former KGB invested in a massive operation, Russian troll farms, to beat Clinton. Russians posing as Americans came within just 3 million votes of pulling that off, enough to give Putin what he wanted.

. . . The Russian information attack on the election did not stop with the hacking and leaking of Democratic emails or the fire hose of stories, true, false and in between, that battered Mrs. Clinton on Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik. Far less splashy, and far more difficult to trace, was Russia’s experimentation on Facebook and Twitter, the American companies that essentially invented the tools of social media and, in this case, did not stop them from being turned into engines of deception and propaganda.

. . . On Wednesday, Facebook officials disclosed that they had shut down several hundred accounts that they believe were created by a Russian company linked to the Kremlin and used to buy $100,000 in ads pushing divisive issues during and after the American election campaign.

On Twitter, as on Facebook, Russian fingerprints are on hundreds or thousands of fake accounts that regularly posted anti-Clinton messages. Many were automated Twitter accounts, called bots, that sometimes fired off identical messages seconds apart — and in the exact alphabetical order of their made-up names, according to the FireEye researchers. . . .

The global economy already took most of the good jobs here. I'm not shedding any tears for Clinton's current unemployment situation.

Maybe if Clinton wasn't such a piece of shit, and didn't surround herself with nothing but other pieces of shit, she could have denied everything. What she did deny, she lied about. The rest nobody even bothered trying to claim wasn't true.

Whoever hacked the DNC and Podesta's emails did the country a favor.

I think my favorite email was when Wolf Blitzer and the DNC were colluding. I can't believe that you people have made it so that man still has a job.

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Going through this article, I've concluded that - once again - there's a notable lack of evidence for any of its claims.

Even more troubling, the article puts genuine people with honestly-held opinions in the same category as alleged bots and trolls - as alleged warriors on the alleged pro-Russian side of the alleged information war. They are people who spread things 'American officials' don't want you to think.

The only propaganda I find evidence for in this article, is the article itself.

Well, supposedly Russia created fake Americans. But there's no indication that, even if it did, they influenced the election. Otherwise, the title would have been "The Fake Americans Russia Created THAT InfluenceD the Election".
Is there evidence for the claim?
Was the election ACTUALLY influenced?
Reading further ...

Quote:a few shots that draw little notice

I wonder if that's self-descriptive ...

Quote:The DCLeaks site had gone live a few days earlier, posting the first samples of material, stolen from prominent Americans by Russian hackers ...

There is not now, nor has there ever been, evidence that Russians did it. So right at the start, I'm pretty sure that this is propaganda, pushing a false, but often-echoed, narrative as 'news'.

Quote:... that battered Mrs. Clinton on Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik ...

With a minuscule penetration into the US market.

Quote:... Russia’s experimentation on Facebook and Twitter, the American companies that essentially invented the tools of social media and, in this case, did not stop them from being turned into engines of deception and propaganda.

The thesis.

Quote: investigation by The New York Times, and new research from the cybersecurity firm FireEye ...

Quote:... were created by a Russian company ... (Internet Research Agency) ... linked ...

Every link I found goes back to one NYTimes article which itself has no evidence.

Quote:... to the Kremlin ...

no evidence

Quote: ... and used to buy $100,000 in ads ...

out of about a half-billion - $500,000,000,000 - spent on ads, total http://elections.ap.org/content/ad-spendingSo far I don't see either evidence OR anything remotely significant about these FB claims.
The case for Twitter is even weaker.

Quote: Given the powerful role of social media in political contests ...

Quote: “We know we have to stay vigilant to keep ahead of people who try to misuse our platform,” Alex Stamos, Facebook’s chief security officer, wrote on Wednesday in a post about the Russia-linked fake accounts and ads. “We believe in protecting the integrity of civic discourse.”

Quote:Facebook officials estimated that of all the “civic content” posted on the site in connection with the United States election, less than one-tenth of one percent resulted from “information operations” like the Russian campaign.

According to FB, "information operations” are a very small fraction of the total.
But it would be nice if they gave an actual estimated figure. "Less than" 0.1% could be 0.000000000000000000001%, and we couldn't tell. (Though it could be that their tracking software doesn't go down to less than 0.1%, as a figure below significance.)

Quote:Russia has been quite open about playing its hacking card. ... “We are living in 1948,” said the adviser, Andrey Krutskikh, referring to the eve of the first Soviet atomic bomb test, in a speech reported by The Washington Post. “I’m warning you: We are at the verge of having something in the information arena that will allow to us to talk to the Americans as equals.”

The "information arena" could be anything.

Quote: Mr. Putin said ... “This is no proof.”
Mr. Putin had a point.

Yes, he does.

Quote:Russia deliberately blurs its role in influence operations, American intelligence officials say.

American intelligence officials say a lot of things, many of dubious legitimacy.

Quote:United States intelligence concluded that DCLeaks.com was created in June 2016 by the Russian military intelligence agency G.R.U.

And this is yet another pristine example of the many things US intelligence says, followed by the the often repeated (especially by the NYTimes) and tired, but equally unevidenced, claims about Guccifer and Wikileaks.

Quote: The Times asked Facebook about these and a half-dozen other accounts that appeared to be Russian creations.

Granny get your gun. The Russians appear to be invading.

Quote: Mobilizing a ‘Bot’ Army

How big is the supposed army?

Quote:... hundreds of accounts ...

An actual figure would be nice. "Hundreds" is somewhere between 200 and 999 accounts. Though that is out of "328 million users on Twitter" or about a third of a billion, again, with a 'b'.

Quote: J. M. Berger, a researcher in Cambridge, Mass., helped build a public web “dashboard” for the Washington-based Alliance for Securing Democracy to track hundreds of Twitter accounts ...

This is the same Berger and the same Alliance for Securing Democracy run by mainly neocons of both parties with an anti-Russian agenda, not an unbiased research organization. https://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Alliance_for_Securing_Democracy

Quote:But there is ample reason to suspect that the Russian meddling may have been far more widespread.

Considering they haven't provided evidence for their thesis in the first place, the chutzpah is outstanding.

Quote: Both on the left and the pro-Trump right, though, some skeptics complain that Moscow has become the automatic boogeyman, accused of misdeeds with little proof. Even those who track Russian online activity admit that in the election it was not always easy to sort out who was who.

"the left and the pro-Trump right" Really. The world breaks down into such simplistic categories.
Aside from that, the article frequently admits it has little (I'd say no) evidence, AS IF that admission somehow exonerates it from making specious claims.
IT DOESN'T.
This is supposed to be a news article. But it's barely disguised propaganda at best, and lazy idle gossip with a NYTimes megaphone at worst.

Quote: Mr. Weisburd said he had labeled some Twitter accounts “Kremlin trolls” based simply on their pro-Russia tweets and with no proof of Russian government ties.

This is very similar to the metrics used by FB and Twitter - labelling is based on content and source-sharing, as well as 'patterns' of social media posting.
That's worse than gossip or even propaganda.
It seeks to delegitimize and actively stifle freedom of speech, of expression ... and of thought.

Quote:The Times contacted several such users, who insisted that they had come by their anti-American, pro-Russian views honestly, without payment or instructions from Moscow.

“Hillary’s a warmonger,” said Marilyn Justice, 66, who lives in Nova Scotia and tweets as @mkj1951. Of Mr. Putin, she said in an interview, “I think he’s very patient in the face of provocations.”
Ms. Justice said she had first taken an interest in Russia during the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, while looking for hockey coverage and finding what she considered a snide anti-Russia bias in the Western media. She said she did get a lot of news from Sputnik and RT but laughed at the notion that she could have Kremlin connections.
Another of the so-called Kremlin trolls, Marcel Sardo, 48, a web producer in Zurich, describes himself bluntly on his Twitter bio as a “Pro-Russia Media-Sniper.” He said he shared notes daily via Skype and Twitter with online acquaintances, including Ms. Justice ...

Quote: ... his prolific posts are a victory for Russia’s information war — that admirers of the Kremlin spread what American officials consider to be Russian disinformation on election hacking, Syria, Ukraine and more.

Because, if you read what American officials don't want you reading, and think what American officials don't want you thinking, and say what American officials don't want you saying ... you belong in the category "Russian enemy".

Meanwhile, SECOND's specious claims

Quote:The former KGB invested in a massive operation, Russian troll farms, to beat Clinton. Russians posing as Americans came within just 3 million votes of pulling that off, enough to give Putin what he wanted.
There was a time when that would have bothered most Americans.

are nowhere to be found in the actual propagand ... I mean ... article, itself.

So not only is the article more fake news, but SECOND is reduced to lying even about that content to try and make its point.

Trump is not the problem. He set himself against the Deep State's agenda. And the Deep State's been heading for WWIII for years.
As for you, you're just a Deep State useful idiot, furthering its agenda. So I hope you enjoy cesium in your coffee. You've earned it.

Quote:Originally posted by second:
The former KGB invested in a massive operation, Russian troll farms, to beat Clinton. Russians posing as Americans came within just 3 million votes of pulling that off, enough to give Putin what he wanted.

So yer sayin' that Clinton WON the Election, and is now President? She was not beaten? Hilliary was not defeated?

Quote:There was a time when that would have bothered most Americans.

There was a time when pretend quasi-pseudo-truth masquerading as actual facts and truth would have bothered most Americans.

Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki:
Going through this article, I've concluded that - once again - there's a notable lack of evidence for any of its claims.

Even more troubling, the article puts genuine people with honestly-held opinions in the same category as alleged bots and trolls - as alleged warriors on the alleged pro-Russian side of the alleged information war. They are people who spread things 'American officials' don't want you to think.

The only propaganda I find evidence for in this article, is the article itself.

Well, supposedly Russia created fake Americans. But there's no indication that, even if it did, they influenced the election. Otherwise, the title would have been "The Fake Americans Russia Created THAT InfluenceD the Election".
Is there evidence for the claim?
Was the election ACTUALLY influenced?
Reading further ...

Quote:a few shots that draw little notice

I wonder if that's self-descriptive ...

Quote:The DCLeaks site had gone live a few days earlier, posting the first samples of material, stolen from prominent Americans by Russian hackers ...

There is not now, nor has there ever been, evidence that Russians did it. So right at the start, I'm pretty sure that this is propaganda, pushing a false, but often-echoed, narrative as 'news'.

Quote:... that battered Mrs. Clinton on Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik ...

With a minuscule penetration into the US market.

Quote:... Russia’s experimentation on Facebook and Twitter, the American companies that essentially invented the tools of social media and, in this case, did not stop them from being turned into engines of deception and propaganda.

The thesis.

Quote: investigation by The New York Times, and new research from the cybersecurity firm FireEye ...

Quote:... were created by a Russian company ... (Internet Research Agency) ... linked ...

Every link I found goes back to one NYTimes article which itself has no evidence.

Quote:... to the Kremlin ...

no evidence

Quote: ... and used to buy $100,000 in ads ...

out of about a half-billion - $500,000,000,000 - spent on ads, total http://elections.ap.org/content/ad-spendingSo far I don't see either evidence OR anything remotely significant about these FB claims.
The case for Twitter is even weaker.

Quote: Given the powerful role of social media in political contests ...

Quote: “We know we have to stay vigilant to keep ahead of people who try to misuse our platform,” Alex Stamos, Facebook’s chief security officer, wrote on Wednesday in a post about the Russia-linked fake accounts and ads. “We believe in protecting the integrity of civic discourse.”

Quote:Facebook officials estimated that of all the “civic content” posted on the site in connection with the United States election, less than one-tenth of one percent resulted from “information operations” like the Russian campaign.

According to FB, "information operations” are a very small fraction of the total.
But it would be nice if they gave an actual estimated figure. "Less than" 0.1% could be 0.000000000000000000001%, and we couldn't tell. (Though it could be that their tracking software doesn't go down to less than 0.1%, as a figure below significance.)

Quote:Russia has been quite open about playing its hacking card. ... “We are living in 1948,” said the adviser, Andrey Krutskikh, referring to the eve of the first Soviet atomic bomb test, in a speech reported by The Washington Post. “I’m warning you: We are at the verge of having something in the information arena that will allow to us to talk to the Americans as equals.”

The "information arena" could be anything.

Quote: Mr. Putin said ... “This is no proof.”
Mr. Putin had a point.

Yes, he does.

Quote:Russia deliberately blurs its role in influence operations, American intelligence officials say.

American intelligence officials say a lot of things, many of dubious legitimacy.

Quote:United States intelligence concluded that DCLeaks.com was created in June 2016 by the Russian military intelligence agency G.R.U.

And this is yet another pristine example of the many things US intelligence says, followed by the the often repeated (especially by the NYTimes) and tired, but equally unevidenced, claims about Guccifer and Wikileaks.

Quote: The Times asked Facebook about these and a half-dozen other accounts that appeared to be Russian creations.

Granny get your gun. The Russians appear to be invading.

Quote: Mobilizing a ‘Bot’ Army

How big is the supposed army?

Quote:... hundreds of accounts ...

An actual figure would be nice. "Hundreds" is somewhere between 200 and 999 accounts. Though that is out of "328 million users on Twitter" or about a third of a billion, again, with a 'b'.

Quote: J. M. Berger, a researcher in Cambridge, Mass., helped build a public web “dashboard” for the Washington-based Alliance for Securing Democracy to track hundreds of Twitter accounts ...

This is the same Berger and the same Alliance for Securing Democracy run by mainly neocons of both parties with an anti-Russian agenda, not an unbiased research organization. https://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Alliance_for_Securing_Democracy

Quote:But there is ample reason to suspect that the Russian meddling may have been far more widespread.

Considering they haven't provided evidence for their thesis in the first place, the chutzpah is outstanding.

Quote: Both on the left and the pro-Trump right, though, some skeptics complain that Moscow has become the automatic boogeyman, accused of misdeeds with little proof. Even those who track Russian online activity admit that in the election it was not always easy to sort out who was who.

"the left and the pro-Trump right" Really. The world breaks down into such simplistic categories.
Aside from that, the article frequently admits it has little (I'd say no) evidence, AS IF that admission somehow exonerates it from making specious claims.
IT DOESN'T.
This is supposed to be a news article. But it's barely disguised propaganda at best, and lazy idle gossip with a NYTimes megaphone at worst.

Quote: Mr. Weisburd said he had labeled some Twitter accounts “Kremlin trolls” based simply on their pro-Russia tweets and with no proof of Russian government ties.

This is very similar to the metrics used by FB and Twitter - labelling is based on content and source-sharing, as well as 'patterns' of social media posting.
That's worse than gossip or even propaganda.
It seeks to delegitimize and actively stifle freedom of speech, of expression ... and of thought.

Quote:The Times contacted several such users, who insisted that they had come by their anti-American, pro-Russian views honestly, without payment or instructions from Moscow.

“Hillary’s a warmonger,” said Marilyn Justice, 66, who lives in Nova Scotia and tweets as @mkj1951. Of Mr. Putin, she said in an interview, “I think he’s very patient in the face of provocations.”
Ms. Justice said she had first taken an interest in Russia during the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, while looking for hockey coverage and finding what she considered a snide anti-Russia bias in the Western media. She said she did get a lot of news from Sputnik and RT but laughed at the notion that she could have Kremlin connections.
Another of the so-called Kremlin trolls, Marcel Sardo, 48, a web producer in Zurich, describes himself bluntly on his Twitter bio as a “Pro-Russia Media-Sniper.” He said he shared notes daily via Skype and Twitter with online acquaintances, including Ms. Justice ...

Quote: ... his prolific posts are a victory for Russia’s information war — that admirers of the Kremlin spread what American officials consider to be Russian disinformation on election hacking, Syria, Ukraine and more.

Meanwhile, SECOND's specious claims

Quote:The former KGB invested in a massive operation, Russian troll farms, to beat Clinton. Russians posing as Americans came within just 3 million votes of pulling that off, enough to give Putin what he wanted.
There was a time when that would have bothered most Americans.

are nowhere to be found in the actual propagand ... I mean ... article, itself.

So not only is the article more fake news, but SECOND is reduced to lying even about that content to try and make its point.

Thanks very much for laying out the details of non-evidence.
Some of us don't have as much time to chase down the plethora of lies.

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I do need to get on with my day.

This effort will cost me in sleep at the end of the day as I try to catch up with real life, after trying to dislodge insane propaganda from the minds of crazy people who couldn't engage in one iota of critical thinking if their lives depended on it.

Trump is not the problem. He set himself against the Deep State's agenda. And the Deep State's been heading for WWIII for years.
As for you, you're just a Deep State useful idiot, furthering its agenda. So I hope you enjoy cesium in your coffee. You've earned it.

Here's the thing...this is what a Special Prosecutor does, he investigates and uncovers any wrongdoing, violation of the federal law, violation of the law in general (of which Trump is accustomed to getting away with in the private sector).

So, let's say, for argument's sake, that a detective is investigating a homicide. And, in the course of the investigation, he finds that there was also a kidnapping of another victim. Now, should the detective ignore the kidnapping? Or does he alert his superior of the crime and dispatch another detective to investigate the kidnapping?

Things are getting interesting.

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
That Mueller brought in the IRS makes it look more and more like the initial "Russian collusion" allegation is deader than a doornail.

I wouldn't be surprised if he came up with charges about everything BUT. Let's keep an eye out for it. Just to keep things interesting, we should start a drinking game for every time "Russian collusion" is charged.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

You know something Keeks, I was wrong about you. I have come to appreciate the masterful skill and effort you exhibit in the art of disengaging fact from fiction in the NY Times article regarding the "Fake Americans" allegedly planted by the Russian government.

To think, you were able to decipher the propaganda machine of the ultra-conservative so-called "professionals" of the Times, and disseminate the truth. You carefully and thoughtfully dismantled the cadre of lies promoted as truth by the obvious insane hordes of the anti-Russian propagandists. They mindlessly, and without a shred of hard evidence, scatter disinformation across the country like locusts; feeding the brainless followers of injustice and chaos.

You brilliantly expose the "crazies" who don't have brain one among them and who are incapable of critical thinking, so much so that they might as well be dead. The Walking Dead. I hope that you pursue your talent for "dislodging insane propaganda" and devote your life to your journalistic skill in exposing the lies from the "professionals" who do this for a living on a day-to-day basis; obviously they are in the wrong business.

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki:
I do need to get on with my day.

This effort will cost me in sleep at the end of the day as I try to catch up with real life, after trying to dislodge insane propaganda from the minds of crazy people who couldn't engage in one iota of critical thinking if their lives depended on it.

Trump is not the problem. He set himself against the Deep State's agenda. And the Deep State's been heading for WWIII for years.
As for you, you're just a Deep State useful idiot, furthering its agenda. So I hope you enjoy cesium in your coffee. You've earned it.

This effort will cost me in sleep at the end of the day as I try to catch up with real life, after trying to dislodge insane propaganda from the minds of crazy people who couldn't engage in one iota of critical thinking if their lives depended on it.

You know something Keeks, I was wrong about you. I have come to appreciate the masterful skill and effort you exhibit in the art of disengaging fact from fiction in the NY Times article regarding the "Fake Americans" allegedly planted by the Russian government.

To think, you were able to decipher the propaganda machine of the ultra-conservative

referring to the New York Times lackeys as anything other than the Libtard Extremists they are, your tongue must be planted so firmly in your cheek I fear you won't be able to eat for weeks

Quote: so-called "professionals" of the Times, and disseminate the truth. You carefully and thoughtfully dismantled the cadre of lies promoted as truth by the obvious insane hordes of the anti-Russian propagandists. They mindlessly, and without a shred of hard evidence, scatter disinformation across the country like locusts; feeding the brainless followers of injustice and chaos.

You brilliantly expose the "crazies" who don't have brain one among them and who are incapable of critical thinking, so much so that they might as well be dead. The Walking Dead.

well put. I didn't know you could see so clearly

Quote:I hope that you pursue your talent for "dislodging insane propaganda" and devote your life to your journalistic skill in exposing the lies from the "professionals" who do this for a living on a day-to-day basis; obviously they are in the wrong business.

SGG

are you taking sides now? Sure, the Professional Liars of the NYT Wing of the Democrap Campaign Committee, who pretend to be "journalists" or fair and unbiased, get paid for their daily work on this propaganda.
But you're saying they are in the wrong business fabrication lies for their Democrap Heroes, that they should switch to the other side and start reporting news, or provide honest and balanced information to the American Electorate? I didn't know you had such a Utopian Patriotic streak in you.
Golly, you almost started sounding like a Constitutionalist. True, the First Amendment does not spell out a reason for Freedom of the Press, but Informed Electorate was a prime argument for it. Imagine if the MainStreamMedia reverted to Informing the Electorate, in this day and age!!
Well, at least there is no danger of NYT reverting to honest journalism, or the public would get really confused with such an About Face.

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
You know something Keeks, I was wrong about you. I have come to appreciate the masterful skill and effort you exhibit in the art of disengaging fact from fiction in the NY Times article regarding the "Fake Americans" allegedly planted by the Russian government.
To think, you were able to decipher the propaganda machine of the ultra-conservative so-called "professionals" of the Times, and disseminate the truth. You carefully and thoughtfully dismantled the cadre of lies promoted as truth by the obvious insane hordes of the anti-Russian propagandists. They mindlessly, and without a shred of hard evidence, scatter disinformation across the country like locusts; feeding the brainless followers of injustice and chaos.
You brilliantly expose the "crazies" who don't have brain one among them and who are incapable of critical thinking, so much so that they might as well be dead. The Walking Dead. I hope that you pursue your talent for "dislodging insane propaganda" and devote your life to your journalistic skill in exposing the lies from the "professionals" who do this for a living on a day-to-day basis; obviously they are in the wrong business.
SGG

I'm curious if you were equally taken in by the NYTimes and its efforts on the Hussein/ WMD meme.
And if not, if you think that the NYTimes, having so obviously engaged in propaganda in the past, is now totally incapable of engaging in propaganda in the present.

Trump is not the problem. He set himself against the Deep State's agenda. And the Deep State's been heading for WWIII for years.
As for you, you're just a Deep State useful idiot, furthering its agenda. So I hope you enjoy cesium in your coffee. You've earned it.

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Meanwhile, this is about as good a time as any to post this.

Has The NYT Gone Collectively Mad?
Sep 13, 2017 9:15 PM

Authored by Robert Parry* via ConsortiumNews.com, [4]

Crossing a line from recklessness into madness, The New York Times published a front-page opus suggesting that Russia was behind social media criticism of Hillary Clinton... [5]

For those of us who have taught journalism or worked as editors, a sign that an article is the product of sloppy or dishonest journalism is that a key point will be declared as flat fact when it is unproven or a point in serious dispute – and it then becomes the foundation for other claims, building a story like a high-rise constructed on sand.

This use of speculation as fact is something to guard against particularly in the work of inexperienced or opinionated reporters.

But what happens when this sort of unprofessional work tops page one of The New York Times one day as a major “investigative” article and reemerges the next day in even more strident form as a major Times editorial? Are we dealing then with an inept journalist who got carried away with his thesis or are we facing institutional corruption or even a collective madness driven by ideological fervor?

What is stunning about the lede story [6] in last Friday’s print edition of The New York Times is that it offers no real evidence to support its provocative claim that – as the headline states – “To Sway Vote, Russia Used Army of Fake Americans” or its subhead: “Flooding Twitter and Facebook, Impostors Helped Fuel Anger in Polarized U.S.”

In the old days, this wildly speculative article, which spills over three pages, would have earned an F in a J-school class or gotten a rookie reporter a stern rebuke from a senior editor. But now such unprofessionalism is highlighted by The New York Times, which boasts that it is the standard-setter of American journalism, the nation’s “newspaper of record.”

In this case, it allows reporter Scott Shane to introduce his thesis by citing some Internet accounts that apparently used fake identities, but he ties none of them to the Russian government. Acting like he has minimal familiarity with the Internet – yes, a lot of people do use fake identities – Shane builds his case on the assumption that accounts that cited references to purloined Democratic emails must be somehow from an agent or a bot connected to the Kremlin.

For instance, Shane cites the fake identity of “Melvin Redick,” who suggested on June 8, 2016, that people visit DCLeaks which, a few days earlier, had posted some emails from prominent Americans, which Shane states as fact – not allegation – were “stolen … by Russian hackers.”

Shane then adds, also as flat fact, that “The site’s phony promoters were in the vanguard of a cyberarmy of counterfeit Facebook and Twitter accounts, a legion of Russian-controlled impostors whose operations are still being unraveled.”

The Times’ Version
In other words, Shane tells us, “The Russian information attack on the election did not stop with the hacking and leaking of Democratic emails or the fire hose of stories, true, false and in between, that battered Mrs. Clinton on Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik. Far less splashy, and far more difficult to trace, was Russia’s experimentation on Facebook and Twitter, the American companies that essentially invented the tools of social media and, in this case, did not stop them from being turned into engines of deception and propaganda.” [7]

Besides the obvious point that very few Americans watch RT and/or Sputnik and that Shane offers no details about the alleged falsity of those “fire hose of stories,” let’s examine how his accusations are backed up:

“An investigation by The New York Times, and new research from the cybersecurity firm FireEye, reveals some of the mechanisms by which suspected Russian operators used Twitter and Facebook to spread anti-Clinton messages and promote the hacked material they had leaked. On Wednesday, Facebook officials disclosed that they had shut down several hundred accounts that they believe were created by a Russian company linked to the Kremlin and used to buy $100,000 in ads pushing divisive issues during and after the American election campaign. On Twitter, as on Facebook, Russian fingerprints are on hundreds or thousands of fake accounts that regularly posted anti-Clinton messages.”

Note the weasel words: “suspected”; “believe”; ‘linked”; “fingerprints.” When you see such equivocation, it means that these folks – both the Times and FireEye – don’t have hard evidence; they are speculating.

And it’s worth noting that the supposed “army of fake Americans” may amount to hundreds out of Facebook’s two billion or so monthly users [8] and the $100,000 in ads compare to the company’s annual ad revenue of around $27 billion [9]. (I’d do the math but my calculator doesn’t compute such tiny percentages.)

So, this “army” is really not an “army” and we don’t even know that it is “Russian.” But some readers might say that surely we know that the Kremlin did mastermind the hacking of Democratic emails!

That claim is supported by the Jan. 6 “intelligence community assessment” that was the work of what President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called “hand-picked” analysts from three agencies – the Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation. But, as any intelligence expert will tell you, if you hand-pick the analysts, you are hand-picking the conclusions.

Agreeing with Putin
But some still might protest that the Jan. 6 report surely presented convincing evidence of this serious charge about Russian President Vladimir Putin personally intervening in the U.S. election to help put Donald Trump in the White House. Well, as it turns out, not so much, and if you don’t believe me, we can call to the witness stand none other than New York Times reporter Scott Shane.[10]

Shane wrote [11] at the time: “What is missing from the [the Jan. 6] public report is what many Americans most eagerly anticipated: hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack. … Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’”

So, even Scott Shane, the author of last Friday’s opus, recognized the lack of “hard evidence” to prove that the Russian government was behind the release of the Democratic emails, a claim that both Putin and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who published a trove of the emails, have denied. While it is surely possible that Putin and Assange are lying or don’t know the facts, you might think that their denials would be relevant to this lengthy investigative article, which also could have benefited from some mention of Shane’s own skepticism of last January, but, hey, you don’t want inconvenient details to mess up a cool narrative.

Yet, if you struggle all the way to the end of last Friday’s article, you do find out how flimsy the Times’ case actually is. How, for instance, do we know that “Melvin Redick” is a Russian impostor posing as an American? The proof, according to Shane, is that “His posts were never personal, just news articles reflecting a pro-Russian worldview.”

As it turns out, the Times now operates with what must be called a neo-McCarthyistic approach for identifying people as Kremlin stooges, i.e., anyone who doubts the truthfulness of the State Department’s narratives on Syria, Ukraine and other international topics.

Unreliable Source
In the article’s last section, Shane acknowledges as much in citing one of his experts, “Andrew Weisburd, an Illinois online researcher who has written frequently about Russian influence on social media.” Shane quotes Weisburd as admitting how hard it is to differentiate Americans who just might oppose Hillary Clinton because they didn’t think she’d make a good president from supposed Russian operatives: “Trying to disaggregate the two was difficult, to put it mildly.”[12]

According to Shane, “Mr. Weisburd said he had labeled some Twitter accounts ‘Kremlin trolls’ based simply on their pro-Russia tweets and with no proof of Russian government ties. The Times contacted several such users, who insisted that they had come by their anti-American, pro-Russian views honestly, without payment or instructions from Moscow.”

One of Weisburd’s “Kremlin trolls” turned out to be 66-year-old Marilyn Justice who lives in Nova Scotia and who somehow reached the conclusion [13] that “Hillary’s a warmonger.” During the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, she reached another conclusion: that U.S. commentators were exhibiting a snide anti-Russia bias perhaps because they indeed were exhibiting a snide anti-Russia bias.

Shane tracked down another “Kremlin troll,” 48-year-old Marcel Sardo, a web producer in Zurich, Switzerland, who dares to dispute the West’s groupthink that Russia was responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine on July 17, 2014, and the State Department’s claims that the Syrian government used sarin gas in a Damascus suburb on Aug. 21, 2013.

Presumably, if you don’t toe the line on those dubious U.S. government narratives, you are part of the Kremlin’s propaganda machine. (In both cases, there actually are serious reasons to doubt the Western groupthinks which again lack real evidence.)

But Shane accuses Sardo and his fellow-travelers of spreading “what American officials consider to be Russian disinformation on election hacking, Syria, Ukraine and more.” In other words, if you examine the evidence on MH-17 or the Syrian sarin case and conclude that the U.S. government’s claims are dubious if not downright false, you are somehow disloyal and making Russian officials “gleeful at their success,” as Shane puts it.

But what kind of a traitor are you if you quote Shane’s initial judgment after reading the Jan. 6 report on alleged Russian election meddling? What are you if you agree with his factual observation that the report lacked anything approaching “hard evidence”? That’s a point that also dovetails with what Vladimir Putin has been saying – that “IP addresses can be simply made up. … This is no proof”?

So is Scott Shane a “Kremlin troll,” too? Should the Times immediately fire him as a disloyal foreign agent? What if Putin says that 2 plus 2 equals 4 and your child is taught the same thing in elementary school, what does that say about public school teachers?

Out of such gibberish come the evils of McCarthyism and the death of the Enlightenment. Instead of encouraging a questioning citizenry, the new American paradigm is to silence debate and ridicule anyone who steps out of line.

You might have thought people would have learned something from the disastrous groupthink about Iraqi WMD, a canard that the Times and most of the U.S. mainstream media eagerly promoted.

But if you’re feeling generous and thinking that the Times’ editors must have been chastened by their Iraq-WMD fiasco but perhaps had a bad day last week and somehow allowed an egregious piece of journalism to lead their front page, your kind-heartedness would be shattered on Saturday when the Times’ editorial board penned a laudatory reprise [14] of Scott Shane’s big scoop.

Stripping away even the few caveats that the article had included, the Times’ editors informed us that “a startling investigation by Scott Shane of The New York Times, and new research by the cybersecurity firm FireEye, now reveal, the Kremlin’s stealth intrusion into the election was far broader and more complex, involving a cyberarmy of bloggers posing as Americans and spreading propaganda and disinformation to an American electorate on Facebook, Twitter and other platforms. …

“Now that the scheming is clear, Facebook and Twitter say they are reviewing the 2016 race and studying how to defend against such meddling in the future. … Facing the Russian challenge will involve complicated issues dealing with secret foreign efforts to undermine American free speech.”

But what is the real threat to “American free speech”?

Is it the possibility that Russia – in a very mild imitation of what the U.S. government does all over the world – used some Web sites clandestinely to get out its side of various stories, an accusation against Russia that still lacks any real evidence?

Or is the bigger threat that the nearly year-long Russia-gate hysteria will be used to clamp down on Americans who dare question fact-lite or fact-free Official Narratives handed down by the State Department and The New York Times?

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Parry_%28journalist%29Robert Parry (journalist)
Robert Parry (born June 24, 1949) is an American investigative journalist best known for his role in covering the Iran-Contra affair for the Associated Press (AP) and Newsweek, including breaking the Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare (CIA manual provided to the Nicaraguan contras) and the CIA and Contras cocaine trafficking in the US scandal in 1985. He was awarded the George Polk Award for National Reporting in 1984 and the I.F. Stone Medal for Journalistic Independence by Harvard's Nieman Foundation in 2015. He has been the editor of Consortiumnews since 1995.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/consortium-news/
least biased bias meter

Trump is not the problem. He set himself against the Deep State's agenda. And the Deep State's been heading for WWIII for years.
As for you, you're just a Deep State useful idiot, furthering its agenda. So I hope you enjoy cesium in your coffee. You've earned it.

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
You know something Keeks, I was wrong about you. I have come to appreciate the masterful skill and effort you exhibit in the art of disengaging fact from fiction in the NY Times article regarding the "Fake Americans" allegedly planted by the Russian government.
To think, you were able to decipher the propaganda machine of the ultra-conservative so-called "professionals" of the Times, and disseminate the truth. You carefully and thoughtfully dismantled the cadre of lies promoted as truth by the obvious insane hordes of the anti-Russian propagandists. They mindlessly, and without a shred of hard evidence, scatter disinformation across the country like locusts; feeding the brainless followers of injustice and chaos.
You brilliantly expose the "crazies" who don't have brain one among them and who are incapable of critical thinking, so much so that they might as well be dead. The Walking Dead. I hope that you pursue your talent for "dislodging insane propaganda" and devote your life to your journalistic skill in exposing the lies from the "professionals" who do this for a living on a day-to-day basis; obviously they are in the wrong business.
SGG

I'm curious if you were equally taken in by the NYTimes and its efforts on the Hussein/ WMD meme.
And if not, if you think that the NYTimes, having so obviously engaged in propaganda in the past, is now totally incapable of engaging in propaganda in the present.

Kinda looks like SGG was the leading edge of recognizing the genius of Kiki.

Quote:I'm curious if you were equally taken in by the NYTimes and its efforts on the Hussein/ WMD meme. And if not, if you think that the NYTimes, having so obviously engaged in propaganda in the past, is now totally incapable of engaging in propaganda in the present.

You have obviously done your homework. Nothing that comes from the NY Times is true. It is part and parcel the philosophy of the ruling class, the aristocratic elite, who palm off their elitist propaganda on the long suffering masses, the teaming wretched populace.

WMDs was a set up from go. It was a pretense to sabotage an American puppet in the region in order to make millions from government contracts that would line the pockets of oligarchs named Bush and Cheney. Besides propaganda is propaganda, and these so-called news outlets are controlled by the filthy rich and represent their iron-fisted grip on world events.

P.S. I know your testing me.

P.P.S. It's also obvious that the Times is looking to set up Russia as the fall guys in the global struggle for power with the United States. Trump is as much a puppet as Sadam was.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki:
As extreme as Trump is, the dems have failed to capitalize on the situation.

Have you wondered what is the dem malady?

I've always known what it was.

The Democrats’ problem is that the Democratic voters mistakenly believe the majority of Americans think we are all in this together. The majority does not think that way. For the majority, if somebody gets more from the government, it means less for them and they are opposed. That’s why they hate this or that government program that is not exclusively targeted to give money to people exactly like themselves. For examples, it's Christians vs Non-Christians and old vs young and whites vs blacks and middle-class vs poor and coasts vs the heartland. The GOP leadership can take advantage of that hatred between groups of Americans to changes laws, kill programs and cut taxes for the wealthy, which is fortunate for me. I am all for cutting taxes for me and my 1% class. I am all for deregulating my business. The Democratic leadership doesn’t protect the fortunes of rich white people as enthusiastically as does the GOP leadership. Very sad for the Democratic party that it won’t place rich white people first among all people and then lie about that priority as the GOP does.

I'm of the mind that that may not happen for a while, until a trial, if any, should happen. My guess is that if Mueller brings someone in, it's pretty serious - as they say in my neck of the woods - he does not play. He will have all his ducks in a row, and you see how he doesn't play to the media, or grand stand, as Trump would say about Comey.

Gee, I hope that they show who it is in a perp walk!

SGG

Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki:
I'm just waiting to see if they release any evidence, and if they do, what claim does it support.

HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

Pence is a wanna-be Bible Thumper and would subject us to Bible verses that he neither follows or believes in. I still can't get over his statement that he goes everywhere with his wife so as not to be tempted by other women....Wow, that is very telling of his character and that he's a weak-minded fool.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

1kiki, it is easy to talk big, then not follow through on the promises. It is making a big speech about how wonderful you are then not writing the check. Who will know that you never mailed it?

What Americans will say is ten-times more generous than what they would actually do for other Americans. The Republican party is stubborn and stingy with tax money. The Democrat party is generous with tax money, being the ones who want to spend more on the poor and healthcare, not less.

Quote:Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Pence is a wanna-be Bible Thumper and would subject us to Bible verses that he neither follows or believes in. I still can't get over his statement that he goes everywhere with his wife so as not to be tempted by other women.
SGG

Could be his way of saying his virility is out of control?
And wimmen just come on to him?
Not to worry about war-monger. :)

I hate charity, yanno that? Charity is like the Alaskan trapper, stuck out in the middle of nowhere, who cuts off his dog's tail (Yanno, that essential piece of anatomy that keeps a dog from freezing to death), eats it, then looks at his poor, shivering dog trying to wrap itself in a bleeding stump of a tail, and tosses is a few of its own bones.

Charity is what happens when the wealthy elite toss a few crumbs back of what they've stolen.

Instead of charity, how about FAIRNESS?

There's a reason why my signature is about pity, which would be no more if the system wasn't rigged to make so many people desperately poor and so very few unimaginably wealthy.

So instead of arguing for "charity", how about arguing for fairness? (I think I know the answer to that.)

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECOND:

About spending tax-money on the poor, especially the nonwhite poor.

I hate charity, yanno that? Charity is like the Alaskan trapper, stuck out in the middle of nowhere, who cuts off his dog's tail (Yanno, that essential piece of anatomy that keeps a dog from freezing to death), eats it, then looks at his poor, shivering dog trying to wrap itself in a bleeding stump of a tail, and tosses is a few of its own bones.

Charity is what happens when the wealthy elite toss a few crumbs back of what they've stolen.

Instead of charity, how about FAIRNESS?

There's a reason why my signature is about pity, which would be no more if the system wasn't rigged to make so many people desperately poor and so very few unimaginably wealthy.

So instead of arguing for "charity", how about arguing for fairness? (I think I know the answer to that.)

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Charity is like the Alaskan trapper, stuck out in the middle of nowhere, who cuts off his dog's tail (Yanno, that essential piece of anatomy that keeps a dog from freezing to death), eats it, then looks at his poor, shivering dog trying to wrap itself in a bleeding stump of a tail, and tosses is a few of its own bones.

Where do you get this sh#t?? No wonder you’re world view is so messed up.

So great, argue for “Fairness” until you’re blue in the face. And while you do the poor should wait? No? Right, the people Without your money and resources will be relying on Charity to get through another day. Walk a mile, toots.

G, traveling, posting as CaptainCrunch. Replies may be spotty or non existant.

Quote:Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Charity is like the Alaskan trapper, stuck out in the middle of nowhere, who cuts off his dog's tail (Yanno, that essential piece of anatomy that keeps a dog from freezing to death), eats it, then looks at his poor, shivering dog trying to wrap itself in a bleeding stump of a tail, and tosses is a few of its own bones.

Where do you get this sh#t?? No wonder you’re world view is so messed up.

So great, argue for “Fairness” until you’re blue in the face. And while you do the poor should wait? No? Right, the people Without your money and resources will be relying on Charity to get through another day. Walk a mile, toots.

G, traveling, posting as CaptainCrunch. Replies may be spotty or non existant.

Since joining this site I can say SIG has posted nothing but lies and misinformation. Her favorite resource is zerohedge. That's a corrupt site that manipulates news stories and reposts them. The staff there hide their identities.

What's my point? SIG lies about everything so why would you believe she is successful? Why would you believe she has money or anything the comes with being well to do? She is a Russian troll, nothing more.

Charity is like the Alaskan trapper, stuck out in the middle of nowhere, who cuts off his dog's tail (Yanno, that essential piece of anatomy that keeps a dog from freezing to death), eats it, then looks at his poor, shivering dog trying to wrap itself in a bleeding stump of a tail, and tosses it a few of its own bones.

Quote: Where do you get this sh#t?? No wonder you’re world view is so messed up. So great, argue for “Fairness” until you’re blue in the face. And while you do the poor should wait? No? Right, the people Without your money and resources will be relying on Charity to get through another day. Walk a mile, toots. - POSTED BY G, traveling, posting as CaptainCrunch. Replies may be spotty or non existant

Oh, you liked that analogy, didn't you? I heard it from an old union organizer 40 years ago, when I was but a youth. I can't possibly do it justice as it was told to me, but obviously it's stuck with me for a long time. And now, it'll stick with you.

Quote:Since joining this site I can say SIG has posted nothing but lies and misinformation. Her favorite resource is zerohedge. That's a corrupt site that manipulates news stories and reposts them. The staff there hide their identities. What's my point? SIG lies about everything so why would you believe she is successful? Why would you believe she has money or anything the comes with being well to do? She is a Russian troll, nothing more. - THUGR

Given my EXTREMELY long history of posting here, the possibility of me being a Russian troll is so remote as to be nonexistent. I can't imagine why you keep clinging to that fantasy, except that you're an imbecile. (With apologies to imbeciles everywhere.)

Do I have money? Yes, more than most, but not as much as some. Hubby and I have set it aside to provide for our mentally challenged daughter. Is that being successful? I dunno, you tell me.

Now, as far as "charity" is concerned, that goes back to "America's interests", one of the essential questions that you've avoided answering since I posted it, maybe as long as a year ago. You know, I can't imagine ANYone claiming to represent America's interests who doesn't have the foggiest notion of what those might be, and for whom that is such new territory of thought that they're actually afraid to answer the question! I even posted a few ideas of my own, just to get you started. Even if you don't answer the question here, you really should give it some private thought.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

Since joining this site I can say SIG has posted nothing but lies and misinformation. Her favorite resource is zerohedge. That's a corrupt site that manipulates news stories and reposts them. The staff there hide their identities. What's my point? SIG lies about everything so why would you believe she is successful? Why would you believe she has money or anything the comes with being well to do? She is a Russian troll, nothing more. - THUGR

Quote:SIG

Given my EXTREMELY long history of posting here, the possibility of me being a Russian troll is so remote as to be nonexistent. I can't imagine why you keep clinging to that fantasy, except that you're an imbecile. (With apologies to imbeciles everywhere.)

All FIREFLY graphics and photos on this page are copyright 2002-2012 Mutant Enemy, Inc., Universal Pictures, and 20th Century Fox.
All other graphics and texts are copyright of the contributors to this website.
This website IS NOT affiliated with the Official Firefly Site, Mutant Enemy, Inc., or 20th Century Fox.